т. Chicherin!

It seems to me that the matter is coming to this: we will pay nothing to anybody; whether we will give a concession to Urkart is a question; we will not give a single regalia.

That's what I think. It is quite possible that we may have to give something. I am not tying my hands. At the decisive moment we will discuss what and how we will give (concession to Urkart or some coupons and so on).

I have a general idea: they are falling apart, we are getting stronger. If we succeed, we should try to give them a shish. Don't tie your hands. I am writing this hastily from myself; if you want to make it official, you always have the right to get the decision of the P[olit]bureau.

I am not aware of Aralov, I don't know what the matter is.

Your Lenin.

P.S. If you want to see me, we'll have a talk.

I do not share Sok[olniko]v's opinion. Credits are not premature, but we must not make heavy sacrifices.

I don't know how one can issue coupons (for 15 years) and not pay on them! In my opinion, then they will be forced to pay with a blockade.

The inscription on the envelope

т. Chicherin (from Lenin).

Fund 2, op. 1, d. 23377, fol. 1, 4 - autograph.

1In the published letter, Lenin responds to G.V.Chicherin on the questions posed by the latter in a letter dated October 24, 1922: "I take this opportunity to write to you about the most important thing. Before Genoa, you wrote to me: "a rupture is advantageous for us, but it must not come from us". Why? I tried in vain to get an answer. It's not enough to have directives on specifics, I need to know the general thought of the government. I was left with an evasive policy.

And now - I speak daily with ambassadors, journalists, write to the Plenipotentiaries - I must know the general thought of the government.

In Sokolnikov's opinion, the loans are premature; we must first get stronger to digest them. But if this is so, why are we making a comedy as if we want credits? A number of recent decisions seem to point to such an idea. But do they? I can't do my job without knowing that.

For propaganda purposes we all say, and I too, that we were demanded in Genoa to restore private property. We ourselves know that this is not true: it was enough to print coupons supposedly payable after 15 years, so that they would never be paid. This would have led to an agreement with governments. The loans are not from the treasury, but from the wallets of private individuals; after agreements with governments, after creating "confidence", wallets can be opened in large enough numbers.

What was the disadvantage of printing coupons that would not pay, but would have an agreement? ("Rolling to Krasin"). I still do not know your actual thought..... Ignorance of our basic thought hinders me in everything" (RCCHIDNI, f. 5, op. 1, d. 2061, l. 17-19).

Having received Lenin's reply, Chicherin marked on the envelope: "Received 22 hours. 15 м. Georg. Chicherin" and immediately wrote a new letter to Lenin: "24/X 1922, 23 h. Dear Vladimir Ilyich, of course, I would be very glad to have a more detailed conversation with you. (Emphasized by Lenin. - Ed.) If "they" are falling apart, the argument is against you, for in 15 years we will be so strong, and "they" so ruined, that no one will ever think of forcing us to pay. The boons have the sense that the argument carries over 15 years from now, when the balance of power will be different. I wouldn't say, however, that "they" are falling apart: only weakening. The crisis is on the wane. The Indian swaraj is no more than the Irish gomrul. But in 15 years we will be strong enough; we need "them" much more now than we will 15 years from now....

If we wait for the "decisive moment," things will cost us a lot more. "Catch the moment!" What was possible in Genoa was no longer possible in The Hague. If we miss the moment, it won't come back for a long time. And in another moment we will be charged much more.

I wrote about Aralov in response to a question put to me by telephone on your behalf" (RCCHIDNI, f. 2, op. 1, d. 23377, fol. 3).